The Analysis of Verbal Behavior

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 101–112 | Cite as

A description of teacher-student verbal interactions in a resource room versus regular classrooms

  • Susan B. Hersh
Article

Abstract

The focus of this study was the description and classification of verbal operants as described by Skinner (1957) that were used by a resource room teacher and two regular education teachers, the compliance responses of two students identified as learning disabled who attended all three classes, and the actual tasks that existed in each setting. These descriptions were used to compare the similarities and differences that may account for student success in a resource classroom and lack of success in mainstream classrooms. The results indicated that the verbal operants could be used to determine the tasks that existed in each setting. Comparisons showed that the greatest differences among the settings existed in the type of “mand” stated, the proportion of instructional to management “mands,” the frequency of compliance to instructional “mands,” and the teacher consequence for compliance or non-compliance with “mands.”

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson-Inman, L., Walker, H. H., & Purcell, J. (1984). Promoting the transfer of skills across settings: Transenvironmental programming for handicapped students in the mainstream. In W. L. Heward, T. E. Heron, D. S. Hill, & J. Trap-Porter (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education (pp. 17–37), Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar
  2. Bijou, S. W., Peterson, R. F., & Ault, M. H. (1968). A method to integrate descriptive and experimental field studies at the level of data and empirical concepts. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 175–191.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Daly, P. M. (1987). A description of the verbal behavior of students during two reading instruction methods. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 5, 67–76.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Doyle, W. (1979). Classroom tasks and students’ abilities. In P. L. Peterson & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Research on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications, Berkley, CA: McCutchan.Google Scholar
  5. Doyle, W. (1981, April). Research on classroom contexts: Toward a knowledge base for policy and practice in teacher education. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Association, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  6. Dunlap, G., Johnson, J. Winterling, V., & Morelli, M.A. (1987). The management of disruptive behavior in unsupervised settings: Issues and directions for a behavioral technology. Education and Treatment of Children, 10, 367–382.Google Scholar
  7. Gutman, A. J., & Rondal, J. A. (1979). Verbal operants in mothers’ speech to non-retarded and Down’s syndrome children matched for linguistic level. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 83, 446–452.Google Scholar
  8. Hundert, J. (1982). Some considerations of planning the integration of handicapped children into the mainstream. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 73–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnson, K. R., & Chase, P. N. (1981). Behavior analysis in instructional design: A functional typology of verbal tasks. The Behavior Analyst, 4, 103–121.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Kerr, M. M., & Zigmond, N. (1986). What do high school teachers want? A study of expectations and standards. Education and Treatment of Children, 9, 239–249.Google Scholar
  11. Marshall, N. R., Hegrenes, J. R., & Goldstein, S. (1973). Verbal interactions: Mothers and their retarded children vs. mothers and their non-retarded children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 77, 415–419.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Martin, J., & Crawford, G. (1976). Thought operants. The Journal of General Psychology, 95, 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McLeish, J., & Martin, J. (1975). Verbal behavior: A review and experimental analysis. The Journal of General Psychology, 93, 3–66.Google Scholar
  14. Michael, J. (1982). Skinner’s elementary verbal relations: Some new categories. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 1, 1–4.Google Scholar
  15. Michael, J. (1988). Establishing operations and the mand. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 6, 3–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Newcomer, P. L. (1977). Special education services for the ‘mildly handicapped’: Beyond a diagnostic and remedial model. The Journal of Special Education, 11, 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sherman, T. M., & Cromier, W. H. (1974). An investigation of the influence of student behavior on teacher behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 11–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Wahler, R. G., Berland, R. M., & Coe, T. C. (1979). Generalization processes in child behavior change. In B. Lahey & A. Kazdin (Eds.), Clinical Child Psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  21. Wehman, P., Abramson, M., & Norman, C. (1977). Transfer of training in behavior modification programs: A review— with special emphasis on classroom application. Psychology in the Schools, 12, 203–214.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan B. Hersh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EducationWilmington CollegeWilmingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations